Are Numbers Real?

[no one]

For some, it multiplies their confusion.

[Fireball]

Fireball, would it be accurate to say that God has an equal standing with mathematics?

In that they are all intangible constructs of the mind?

Well, that's a fairly complex question. My personal take is that the relationships of physical objects (motion, mass, quantity, etc.) may be described by mathematics, whether or not there is an observer there to make an observation and give that description. I'm certainly no solipsist in that regard.

As for a god, nobody at all can come up with a definition that anyone else can agree on, it seems.

[brewer]

For some, it multiplies their confusion.

Well that's just antilog-ical.

[The Valkyrie]

Nope.

Numbers are made up and should be ignored.

Like gods.

Let's test it out. I'll provide you with a bank account number and you can transfer over the "made up" numbers from your paycheck. If they transfer, then we have evidence that numbers are not made up and should not be ignored.

... but if you like, we can retest biweekly and check our results.

I don't think you could live on my salary.

[bennyboy]

The answer to the question depends on what you mean by real.

[ignoramus]

He means really really real! Like love! and other catastrophes! hehe

[vulcanlogician]

The answer to the question depends on what you mean by real.

Without opening a whole new can of worms, let's just put the question like this: Is math something we create or something we discover? If it is something that we discover, then that implies it has "an existence" of some sort or another, independent of our perceptions.

I suppose another way of framing the question could be: Does math make truth statements? That is, does math make objectively verifiable claims? It could be argued that it does.

[Foxaèr]

Numbers are the mere representations we have chosen as the medium for counting.

[robvalue]

The answer to the question depends on what you mean by real.

Without opening a whole new can of worms, let's just put the question like this: Is math something we create or something we discover? If it is something that we discover, then that implies it has "an existence" of sort or another, independent of our perceptions.

I suppose another way of framing the question could be: Does math make truth statements? That is, does math make objectively verifiable claims? It could be argued that it does.

We create maths. We discover ways in which particular maths has applications when applied to reality.

Remember that maths need not have any bearing on reality at all. To say that you "discover" a new mathematical system would be metaphorical only; it would be like exploring the platonic plane of abstract concepts.

Maths makes statements which are either true or false within their own framework. They are true, essentially, because we say they are true. They are a logical result of applying the rules which we say are true. Verifying they are true is a matter of making sure the rules have been correctly followed.

[vulcanlogician]

We create maths. We discover ways in which particular maths has applications when applied to reality.

Remember that maths need not have any bearing on reality at all. To say that you "discover" a new mathematical system would be metaphorical only; it would be like exploring the platonic plane of abstract concepts.

Maths makes statements which are either true or false within their own framework. They are true, essentially, because we say they are true. They are a logical result of applying the rules which we say are true. Verifying they are true is a matter of making sure the rules have been correctly followed.

So (concerning right triangles) it is only true that the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the square of the sum of the other two sides because we say it's true. This is not a fact that we discovered about right triangles? Is this what you're saying?